Senate debates AI, child-exploitation bill; amendment to remove mandatory minimum is tabled

The South Carolina Senate debated S.28, a bill that would add provisions to state law addressing visual depictions of minors created or altered with AI or other means and that sets felony ranges and related penalties, and it took multiple amendment votes before the measure was ordered for a second reading.

Supporters and opponents spent more than an hour discussing how the statute should treat different forms of possession, production and distribution of such images and whether judges should retain discretion to impose less than a statutory minimum in some cases. The chamber tabled one amendment that would have removed mandatory minimums for certain offenses and approved other amendments to clarify who may lawfully handle material and to require a state education-and-notification policy for students.

The measure as presented includes sentencing ranges discussed on the floor: simple possession subject to a penalty range of 0 to 10 years; production, distribution, and possession with intent to distribute subject to 2 to 10 years. During debate, one senator summarized those elements to colleagues: "So if you possess it, 0 to 10. If you produce the material, then it's 2 to 10. If you distribute it, 2 to 10. If you possess it with intent to distribute it, 2 to 10." The sponsor and other backers said the bill is aimed at addressing harms from both real and AI-generated child sexual material.

An amendment by the senator from Williamsburg sought to give courts broader sentencing discretion and to avoid mandatory minimums for some offenses, with the senator arguing that judges need latitude to consider defendants' histories and circumstances. The senator said, "how we are measured as a society and as a state will be based on how we treat, the least of these, the most vulnerable." Opponents of that amendment argued some conduct is so harmful that a firm minimum is appropriate. After a roll-call vote the motion to table the amendment passed 27 to 12.

The Senate approved two other changes: a technical exemption adding defense counsel to the list of persons who may receive images while performing their duties; and an education-and-notification amendment directing the Department of Education, the State Law Enforcement Division (SLED), and the Attorney General, as appropriate, to develop and implement a policy to educate students about the law and report back by July 1, 2026. The senator who offered the education amendment said the intent was to ensure students know that certain image creation and distribution can carry severe criminal penalties and to have a centralized state effort to notify and educate.

Senators also agreed to withdraw an earlier amendment that would have required local districts specifically to implement notification policies, replacing it with the state-led approach. After the amendments were resolved, the Senate ordered S.28 a second reading; the chamber recorded a second-reading vote of 39 to 0 to advance the bill to that stage.

What happened today is procedural: the bill remains under Senate consideration with amendments adopted and one proposed change tabled. The measure will return on second reading for further action.

Votes at a glance - Amendment 4A (Williamsburg) — motion to table: tabled by roll-call vote, 27 yes, 12 no (tabling motion prevailed). The clerk recorded Aye/No votes on the roll call. - Amendment (Devine) — added defense-counsel exemption: adopted (voice vote). - Amendment (Hembry) — state-level education/notification policy; reporting back by 07/01/2026: adopted (voice vote). - Withdrawal of amendment 5 (Garrett education-direction to local districts): withdrawn by unanimous consent. - S.28 — ordered a second reading; second-reading vote recorded 39–0.

Next steps: S.28 will return to the Senate calendar for second reading and further floor consideration or passage votes.